COVID- 19

Hall of Famer
Posts: 5712

Re: COVID- 19

21 Jan 2021 21:51 pm:

Stecks;

I am uncertain about the Imperial research. Last thing I read was that the stage one testing was complete, and that it had moved onto the next stage which from memory was developing their RNA based vaccine with a UK Biotech company ( name eludes me ) which involved a none-syringe application . Unlike the Pfizer RNA vaccine which of course has to be stored at such low temperatures , the Imperial vaccine was being developed to be stable even at warm temperatures. Again ; can't remember the exact maximum temperature, but think it was around 30-40 oC.

The later phases on the testing were planned to involve a lot of participants as part of a planned cooperation with Indonesia. I think this was discussed last summer but have not read anything about that since. Maybe it's still work in progress. I can't imagine it being scrapped and hopefully it will be concluded successfully. I am uncertain where the primary funding was coming from. Perhaps partly from Indonesia; and so maybe if it gets to the approval stage and get the right efficacy results it might even be produced in that country ?. One would hope that if it does get to that stage that it would be approved and also be produced in the UK.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 6660
Location: Longlevens

Re: COVID- 19

21 Jan 2021 22:19 pm:

aka John Neary
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4346

Re: COVID- 19

21 Jan 2021 22:39 pm:

That's disappointing - back in early summer they felt this one would be early 2021.

I believe the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is the most likely to be approved next.
Hall of Famer
Posts: 2136

Re: COVID- 19

21 Jan 2021 22:50 pm:

steckers wrote:That's disappointing - back in early summer they felt this one would be early 2021.

I believe the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is the most likely to be approved next.


With a name like that Steckers, its bound to fail!

How did the jab go GM, any sign of that extra nose yet?
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5712

Re: COVID- 19

22 Jan 2021 09:43 am:

Reporting of significant numbers of people being fined for breaching the lockdown regulations .

The Government should pass emergency legislation that not only can the police fine those breaking the rules but ALSO that those who are breaking them in certain circumstances are placed on the criminal record bureau register.

That might make a few more people think twice !!!.

Certainly those attending or organising events during the lockdown should face getting a criminal record and maybe those travelling more than 5 miles from home without an approved reason .

I am convinced many people consider the lockdown rules to be guidelines and not serious offences. Where someone's life is potentially put at risk from someone else breaching the rules, then this is surely criminal negligence at best. At worse potentially manslaughter.
Hall of Famer
Posts: 2136

Re: COVID- 19

22 Jan 2021 10:36 am:

More encouraging is the proposal to give anyone self isolating £500, there's different versions of who would be eligible but it might actually address the issue of people not self isolating or testing because they/their families would be in dire economic straits if they do.
Hall of Famer
Posts: 1364

Re: COVID- 19

22 Jan 2021 11:22 am:

Gloucester Mute wrote:Bl00dy hell RTS/Andy you don't half bang-on like a complete know-all. Please let me know post-Lockdown if you're ever going to be in the Dursley vicinity or travelling on public transport so I can fully hide at home and avoid your relentless droning-on.

IF there is a Mrs RTS2 please pass on my condolences to her when you spare her some of your infinite wisdom. ;)

My guess is most of your valuable time is spent advising SAGE/WHO/UN/NATO/all London cabbies + LB............


Mute have a re-read of this post and assess whether you think it is particularly helpful. It comes across as a little hurtful if you ask me and putting a smiley emoji at the end doesn't really diminish this. Fair play to RTS2 for taking it on this chin.

One option is to skim over the posts you don't like (in which case I doubt you'll read this), but when someone takes time to research something sniping back at them with playground insults is a little undermining in my opinion.

That said this is a free forum so post what you feel, a little insight in how you come across might be helpful.
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5712

Re: COVID- 19

22 Jan 2021 11:46 am:

I have mixed thoughts about the £500 pay out Lucifer. Call me cynical but, what about those who then get the £500 and then still break the self-isolation rules ?.

If there was an effective tagging system in place then fine; but there never will be and there are those who will find excuses why their mobile phones were not working when they switch off their GPS software if there was !.

My thoughts are that the rules need to be stricter. The Govt' have ( in fairness ) been pretty generous to employers and employees ( in comparison to most countries ) through the furlough scheme; self-employed scheme etc. ( except to company Directors who rely on taxable dividends for their income ) . The line must be drawn somewhere .

IF people break the rules, when they are confirmed as being infected with Covid-19 they should face serious fines etc. for breaking the rules.

I would prefer to see a system where the person is in receipt of a full salary which is paid through PAYE via their employer ( or an 80 % paid by the Gov't and balance paid by the employer would would have to pay this by law )who then claims this back upon signing a statutory declaration that the employee has not been in work for the prescribed period, and also on the basis that those employees have a clear PCR test before they return to work that is logged with the employer. Criminal offence and high fines for complicit employers who commit fraud; although I can't see many ( if any ) employers wanting an employee to return to work with Covid-19 !.
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5712

Re: COVID- 19

22 Jan 2021 11:46 am:

For those not working , then one assumes they are already in the mode of having to manage ( sadly ) with state benefits. I could argue that some people getting the £500 could actually ( in effect be receiving an added " incentive" to go to the shops and buy a new TV as for some again they will not spend their £500 online as they should.

I don't intend to sound patronising to those on benefits .For those who have lost their employment through Covid ( or for any reason beyond their own making) I have the upmost sympathy. In effect it keeps the status quo for the unemployed and self-employed; as employees will not be any better off than they are but at the same time it ensures they will be no worse -off and again that they don't have extra money to spend when they break the rules and go to the shop.

Perhaps the £500 is also seen as a £ 5 billion economic stimulus assuming another 10 million people were to catch the virus ?. I think that IF this is correct that the Govt. need to re-think this or reject it.

I cannot imagine my Grandparents generation getting paid by the War time Government to keep their lights off during the blitz!!!.

A ration card was all they received.

Had they broken the rules, they would have faced serious repercussions and been ostracised by the community.

We have become far too liberal; tolerant and that is at least half of the problem. Get tough and make the rules clear.
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5712

Re: COVID- 19

22 Jan 2021 11:57 am:

Loveyjoy; I laughed partly because when I was on the forum last night, I saw John ( GM ) had just posted on the main Rugby forum. ;)

Immediately I thought of my postings on this forum in the last 24 hours and my instinct ;) :D told me that he would comment.

Sure enough ....

Fair play to him he makes me smile.... ;) :D
PreviousNext

Return to COVID-19 Support